MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2510417393 · doi:10.1920/re.ifs.2024.0837

Parental income and child outcomes: what can we learn from material deprivation?

2005· report· en· W2510417393 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Issues and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPovertyGovernment (linguistics)Child povertyQuarter (Canadian coin)Baseline (sea)Low incomeDemographic economicsEconomicsPublic economicsEconomic growthPolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since the Government put reducing child poverty at the centre of its domestic policy agenda since 1999, it has introduced a programme of very big increases in benefits and tax credits for families with children. Although such increases almost by definition help the Government to meet its proximate policy aims, namely to reduce incomebased measures of child poverty, by a quarter relative to a 1998-99 baseline by 2004-05, and by one half by 2010-11, it remains an open question whether, and how much these financial transfers will have affected other, possibly more meaningful, measures of well-being, besides income.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.828
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.318 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Issues and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207